education

Matthew Lynch published in Early Childhood, Elementary Education, Parental Involvement

Should parents ask their children to apologize?

Craig Smith, University of Michigan

Have you ever felt deserving of an apology and been upset when you didn’t get one? Have you ever found it hard to deliver the words, I’m sorry?

Such experiences show how much apologies matter. The importance placed on apologies is shared by many cultures. Diverse cultures even share a great deal in common when it comes to how apologies are communicated.

When adults feel wronged, apologies have been shown to help in a variety of ways:
Apologies can reduce retaliation; they can bring about forgiveness and empathy for wrongdoers; and they can aid in the repair of broken trust. Further, sincere apologies have the physiological effect of lowering blood pressure more quickly, especially among those who are prone to hold on to anger.

How do children view and experience apologies? And what do parents think about when to prompt their young ones to apologize?

How children understand apologies

Research shows that children as young as age four grasp the emotional implications of apology. They understand, for example, that an apology can improve the feelings of someone who’s been upset. Preschoolers also judge apologizing wrongdoers to be more likable, and more desirable as partners for interaction and cooperation.

Children as young as four understand the emotional meaning of an apology. Funkyah, CC BY-NC-ND

Recent studies have tested the actual impact of apologies on children. In one such study, a group of four- to seven-year-olds received an apology from a child who failed to share, while another group did not get an apology. The participants who received the apology felt better and viewed the offending child as nicer as well as more remorseful.

Another study exposed children to a more distressing event: A person knocked over a tower that six- to seven-year-olds were building. Some children got an apology, some did not. In this case, a spontaneous apology did not improve children’s upset feelings. However, the apology still had an impact. Children who got an apology were willing to share more of their attractive stickers with the person who knocked over the tower compared to those who did not get an apology.

This finding suggests that an apology led to forgiveness in children, even if sadness about the incident understandably lingered. Notably, children did feel better when the other person offered to help rebuild their toppled towers. In other words, for children, both remorseful words and restorative actions make a difference.

When does a child’s apology matter to parents?

Although apologies carry meaning for children, views on whether parents should ask their children to apologize vary. A recent caution against apology prompting was based on the mistaken notion that young children have limited social understanding. In fact, young children understand a great deal about others’ viewpoints.

When and why parents prompt their children to apologize has not been systematically studied. In order to gain better insight into this question, I recently conducted a study with my colleagues Jee Young Noh and Michael Rizzo at the University of Maryland and Paul Harris at Harvard University.

We surveyed 483 parents of three- to 10-year-old children. Most participants were mothers, but there was a sizable group of fathers as well. Parents were recruited via online parenting discussion groups and came from communities all around the U.S.. The discussion groups had a variety of orientations toward parenting.

In order to account for the possibility that parents might want to show themselves in the best light, we took a measure of “social desirability bias” from each parent. The results reported here emerged after we statistically corrected for the influence of this bias.

A card from daughter to mother. Todd Ehlers, CC BY-ND

We asked parents to imagine their children committing what they would consider to be “transgressions.” We then asked them how likely they would be to prompt an apology in each scenario. We also asked parents to rate how important they felt it was for their children to learn to apologize in a variety of situations. Finally, we asked the parents about their general approaches to parenting.

The large majority of parents (96 percent) felt that it was important for their children to learn to apologize following an incident in which children upset another person on purpose. Further, 88 percent felt it was important for their children to learn to apologize in the aftermath of upsetting someone by mistake.

Fewer than five percent of the parents surveyed endorsed the view that apologies are empty words. However, parents were sensitive to context.

Parents reported being especially likely to prompt apologies following their children’s intentional and accidental “moral transgressions.” Moral transgressions involve issues of welfare, justice, and rights, such as stealing from or hurting another person.

Parents viewed apologies as relatively less important following their children’s transgressions of social convention (e.g., breaking a rule in a game, interrupting a conversation).

Apology as a way to mend rifts

It’s noteworthy that parents were very likely to anticipate prompting apologies following incidents in which their children upset others on purpose and by mistake.

This suggests that a focus for many parents, when prompting apologies, is addressing the outcomes of their children’s social missteps. Our data suggest that parents use apology prompts to teach their children how to manage difficult social situations, regardless of underlying intentions.

Parents may prompt an apology to mend an interpersonal rift. Girl image via www.shutterstock.com

For example, 88 percent of parents indicated that they would typically prompt an apology if their child broke a peer’s toy by mistake (in the event that the child did not apologize spontaneously).

Indeed, parents especially anticipated prompting apologies following accidental mishaps that involved their children’s peers (and not parents themselves as the wronged parties). When a child’s peer is a victim, parents likely recognize that apologies can quickly mend potential interpersonal rifts that may otherwise linger.

We also asked parents why they viewed apology prompts as important for their children. In the case of moral transgressions, parents saw these prompts as tools for helping children take responsibility. In addition, they used apology prompts for promoting empathy, teaching about harm, helping others feel better and clearing up confusing situations.

However, not all parents viewed the importance of apology prompting in the same way. There was a subset of parents who were relatively permissive: warm and caring but not overly inclined to provide discipline or expect mature behavior from their children.

Most of these parents were not wholly dismissive of the importance of apologies, but they consistently indicated being less likely to provide prompting to their children, compared to the other parents in the study.

When to prompt an apology

Overall, most parents in our study viewed apologies as important in the lives of children. And the child development research described above indicates that many children share this view.

But are there more and less effective ways to prompt a child to apologize? I argue that parents should consider whether a child will offer a prompted apology willingly and sincerely. A recently completed study sheds some light on why.

When should parents prompt an apology? Zvi Kons, CC BY-NC

In this study – currently under review – we asked four- to nine-year-old children to evaluate two types of apologies that were prompted by an adult. One apology was willingly given to the victim after the apology prompt; the other apology was given only after additional adult coercion (“You need to say you’re sorry!”).

We found that 90 percent of the children viewed the recipient of the prompted, “willingly given” apology as feeling better. However, only 22 percent of the children connected a coerced apology to improved feelings in the victim.

So, as parents ponder the merits of prompting apologies from children, it seems important to refrain from pushing one’s child to apologize when he or she is not ready, or is simply not remorseful. Most young children don’t view coerced apologies as effective.

In such cases, interventions aimed at calming down, increasing empathy and making amends may be more constructive than pushing a resistant child to deliver an apology. And, of course, components like making amends can accompany willingly given apologies as well.

Finally, to arguments that apologies are merely empty words that young children parrot, it’s worth noting that we have many rituals that involve rather scripted verbal exchanges, such as when two people in love say “I do” at a wedding or commitment ceremony.

Just as these scripted words carry deep cultural and personal meaning, so too can other culturally valued verbal scripts, such the words in an apology. Thoughtfully teaching young children about apologizing is one aspect of teaching them how to be caring and well-regarded members of their communities.

The Conversation

Craig Smith, Research Investigator, University of Michigan

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Bullying, Education Leadership, First Year Teachers, Policy & Reform,

14 Signs of Cyberbullying in the Classroom

By Gabe Duverge

One of the biggest trends affecting education across the country is the migration of bullying to digital media, which is commonly referred to as cyberbullying. About 7 percent of students in grades 6-12 experience cyberbullying each year, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Unlike traditional bullying, cyberbullying is much harder for educators to detect and address. The perpetrators are often able to maintain anonymity, and much of the cyberbullying activity occurs outside of school.

Like traditional bullying, there are warning signs for teachers to watch for in their students. These signs can help you identify a victim or a cyberbully and step into the situation. Cyberbullying can be quite harmful to the well-being of students if it goes unchecked. In addition, the negative effects on students can severely damage your ability to manage the classroom.

Emotional Signs of Cyberbullying

Emotional changes in a student might be hard to see, but they are often some of the most severe signs. These signals show that cyberbullying has really had an emotional impact on a student.

1. Becomes a Loner

Cyberbullying victims often take every opportunity to keep to themselves. They refrain from being in groups and take steps to isolate themselves. For typically outgoing students, this will be an obvious change.

2. Mood Swings

You may witness a victim have emotional outbursts and mood swings. A situation may go from very calm to contentious quite quickly. This can occur both in a group setting and on an individual level.

3. Increased Stress

A student struggling to manage stress could be a cyberbullying victim. You may notice this during normally stressful times or in situations where the student wouldn’t normally be stressed.

4. Displays Aggressive Behavior

Lashing out aggressively is common among cyberbullying victims. This is especially true among students who are not usually aggressive. They may show aggression against peers or even educators during any situation.

5. Displays Symptoms of Depression

One of the severe effects of cyberbullying is depression. Among youth, depression may manifest as constant sadness, restlessness, a lack of enthusiasm, chronic fatigue and other symptoms. If teachers witness a student with symptoms of depression, they should immediately contact a guidance counselor and the parents. Untreated depression can have very negative effects on a student.

Academic Signs of Cyberbullying

Teachers are in the best position to identify the reasons behind a student falling behind academically. Victims of cyberbullying can take steps backward in the classroom just like in other aspects of their life. Here are a few academic-related clues that cyberbullying may be taking place.

6. Doesn’t Attend School

Teachers may see students miss school more frequently. If a student begins missing significant time, contact a parent to better understand the reason. This is a good time to get clues on whether something else is afoot.

7. Work Ethic Drops

Maybe a student stops turning in homework or submits incomplete assignments. Victims of cyberbullying may stop contributing in class regularly. This is especially true of often-successful students who are struggling with a cyberbullying situation.

8. Skips Class

Cutting class is never acceptable, but some students may try to avoid interacting in class by skipping it altogether. This may be to avoid the cyberbully or just to act out.

9. Loses Interest in School

Cyberbullying can turn a once-star student into someone less excited about school. If students who are regularly involved in the classroom begin to care less, they may be suffering from cyberbullying.

10. Grades Drop

The overall grades of victims of cyberbullying often drop. This may include performing poorly on tests, missing assignments and struggling in group projects. A sudden drop in grades may be a cry for help from a victim truly struggling.

Social Signs of Cyberbullying

Cyberbullying can have a tremendous impact on how students relate to their peers socially. Cyberbullies typically attack someone they know well. Students may stop trusting their usual social group and withdraw. Here are a few specific examples.

11. Stops Participating in Social Activities

A student who is on a team or in an after-school club may stop participating because of cyberbullying. Teachers who notice a previously involved student suddenly lose interest in extracurricular activities may want to explore what’s wrong and move from there.

12. Stops Eating or Sleeping

This may be harder for teachers to notice, but students struggling with cyberbullying often sleep and eat less. This will be evident during lunchtime or if a student falls asleep during class.

13. Hurts Self

Self-harming is not uncommon for victims of cyberbullying. While a teacher may not quickly notice this, they may notice a student wearing different clothing or trying to hide signs of self-harm. Friends of the student may also provide clues to potential self-harming.

14. Changes in Friends

Students who suffer from cyberbullying may switch their group of friends completely. This could be a sign that the cyberbully is someone close to them or that their feelings of self-worth have changed.

Understanding Cyberbullying

The increasing use of digital communication by young people is driving the rise in cyberbullying. Teachers must develop a strong understanding of cyberbullying and other issues affecting education. The online graduate education degrees at Campbellsville University can help you advance your career by gaining the knowledge and credentials you need. Learn more about taking the next step in your education career today.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Matthew Lynch, Policy & Reform

3 Reasons Not to Adopt Year-Round Schooling

I have long been a proponent of year-round schooling. In the past, I have often discussed why I feel that teachers should get behind the push to support year-round schooling and how more consistent time in the classroom will lead to higher student performance, boosting teacher accountability ratings and accommodating a much more streamlined education process. But is it really worth up-ending the school system as we know it?

Let’s look at some reasons to be concerned about changing from our traditional summers-off calendar to a year-round schooling model.

1. It could end up being more expensive.

The summer months are typically the highest ones for energy consumption. In fact, the average electricity bill for homeowners in the summer months goes up 4 to 8 percent. Having empty classrooms in the summer months means less money going out to air conditioning and prevents other warm-weather costs from hitting school utility budgets. It may seem like a minor point, but an increase in utility bills for one-quarter of the year really could hurt schools’ bottom lines.

2. The children won’t have enough down time.

Some childhood development experts believe that particularly when it comes to younger students, time off in the summer months is a vital component of healthy development. The argument follows that kids are not designed to spend so much of their time inside classroom walls and that the warmer, pleasant weather of the summer provides a perfect opportunity to get outside and experience childhood.

There’s a big problem with this argument, though. It’s that most children these days are not spending their summers frolicking in fields of flowers or running around their neighborhoods, hanging out with other kids.

The days of kids spending their summers outside, communing with nature and getting plenty of exercise, are long gone. A recent Harvard University study found that school-age children tend to gain weight at a faster pace during the summer months than during the school year, a fact attributed to more time spent in sedentary activities like watching television or using mobile devices instead of being outside or participating in active pursuits. Now, not only must K-12 students relearn the academic items, but they must also shift their mentalities from less-active, sedentary ones to sharp, alert learning models – and teachers face the brunt of this responsibility.

The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry reports that by the time children graduate from high school, they will have spent more time watching television than in classrooms. What’s more – children who watch an excessive amount of television generally have lower grades in school, read fewer books and have more health problems. While some children visit summer camps, or attend child care when school is out, others stay at home, inside, with not much else to do than watch TV or play games on electronic devices. This is especially true for kids who are middle-school age or higher and are able to stay home alone when parents work. The “down time” of the summer months is really just empty time, often void of anything academically or developmentally advantageous.

3. There might be some scheduling issues caused by the calendar change.

For parents with children of different ages and in different schools, a year-round schedule could present serious scheduling issues. This argument assumes that schools would actually adhere to different time off schedules – something that seemingly could be adjusted so that all schools within a particular district or geographic area were on the same schedule. There is also the child care debate that says it would be difficult for working parents to find babysitters for one or two weeks at a time every few months, as opposed to three months straight in the summer. Again though, the market adjusts with demand and it seems to me that child care centers and camps would offer programs when students needed them. Just because those programs are not available now does not mean they would not exist when families were willing to pay for them.

The most common arguments against year-round schooling seem like a stretch. They reek more of the fear of change rather than actual concern. They are based on ungrounded assumptions and are simply not strong enough to stand against the reasons we should adopt a year-round schooling model here in the United States.

What arguments against year-round schooling do you hear? What ones do you agree with?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in International Education

Why Turkey wants to silence its academics

Fatma Müge Göçek, University of Michigan

After the July 15 coup attempt in Turkey, one of the first actions of the Turkish state and government was to purge thousands of academics and deans from office.

In a crackdown that rapidly spread across civil and military services, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan ordered the closure of thousands of private schools and many universities. Some 15,000 employees at the education ministry were fired, while more than 1,500 university deans were asked to resign.

So, why did Turkey’s government go after academics, and how were they able to force so many to resign?

I am a sociologist who grew up in Turkey and went through its university system. Even after moving to the United States, I have been in close contact with academia in Turkey – organizing many academic events with Turkish universities and collaborating with faculty.

I believe that the answer to the above question lies in the unique design of the institutions of higher education in Turkey.

Let’s start with history

Soon after the establishment of the Republic of Turkey in 1923, a law bringing all educational institutions under state control was promulgated.

Prior to that – in the Ottoman Empire – Western-style institutions of higher education established by the state, by Western missionaries and non-Muslim minorities as well as by religious institutions (medrese) had coexisted.

Istanbul University. Andreas Hunziker, CC BY-NC-ND

But, in the newly established republic, the control of all institutions, including institutions of higher education, came to rest with the Republican elite.

Most of the faculty were treated by the state and its governments as state officials. The faculty too often regarded themselves as such. In fact, to this day, they are even issued different color passports to mark their distinction from ordinary citizens.

The 1980 military coup in Turkey further institutionalized state control over higher education institutions. The constitution was rewritten, restricting the rights and freedoms of all citizens. As part of the 1982 constitution, the military-led government set up the Higher Education Institution (HEI) – an umbrella organization overseeing all universities administratively, academically and financially.

State control over universities had always been substantial, but with this action, it got institutionalized. For even though the HEI, like the judiciary, was in name fully independent, appointments to the HEI were overseen and approved by the state.

For instance, while university faculty voted to elect their chairs, directors, deans and presidents, the appointment of university presidents was contingent on the approval of the president of the Turkish Republic and the appointment of deans contingent upon the approval of HEI.

Opening up Turkey’s markets

In 1984, Turkey began a process of economic liberalization. Turkish elites started to gradually transform the state-controlled economy into a market-centered one. That ended the period of dominance of state-run universities.

Given the vast, unmet demand for universities in Turkey where only one in three applicants could get into a university, the state relinquished its control. Many private, nonprofit universities were established.

There are 193 universities in Turkey today. Murad Sezer/Reuters

Today, there are about 193 universities in Turkey, of which 109 are state universities and 84 private. The private universities in Turkey were established either by wealthy individuals or private foundations.

I would argue that these private universities weakened state control over education – especially research and faculty recruitment. As they did not receive public funds, the internal administration of these universities was somewhat less influenced by the state.

These private universities also strengthened civil society: More faculty came to be involved in education, research and teaching courses that stimulated students to think differently. The faculty could now openly design courses that tackled Turkey’s problems, such as a critical analyses of Turkish nationalism and culture on the one side, and domestic violence and gender issues on the other.

Despite this change, state influence on private universities was still visible to many of us in academia. For example, we would hear about the pressure from the Turkish state to hire former state bureaucrats as faculty and to host conferences where people with particular pro-government views were invited.

So, while all universities and also the HEI were autonomous bodies – just like the judiciary – that was not how things worked in practice.

AKP and academic control

When the Justice and Development Party (AKP) initially came to power, it did take some steps to address some of the problems in higher education. For example, the ban on women wearing veils on campuses was lifted and funding for scientific research was substantially increased. The tenure process was made more fair and less arbitrary.

However, all universities, including private universities, continued to be under the constant scrutiny of HEI. And checks on academic freedom continued.

For example, when the the German Parliament passed the Armenian Genocide resolution anonymously on June 2, 2016, university presidents came under pressure to issue public statements supporting Turkish foreign policy.

To this day, the Armenian Genocide of 1915 – in which a million Armenians lost their lives – remains a highly sensitive issue in Turkey. This issue is similar to Turkey’s ongoing conflict with Kurds. Public discussions of such issues have always been problematic.

Connection of state and knowledge

It is a truism that knowledge is power. Those who control knowledge have ultimate power in a society. Since educational institutions are among the most significant places for research, their control becomes crucial in autocratic states. Rulers want to closely monitor access to knowledge and therefore to power.

Scholar Büşra Ersanlı, a political scientist studying the connection between between state and knowledge in Turkey, points out how the Turkish state has constantly taken measures to imbue all school textbooks with nationalist discourse glorifying the state.

Supporters of Gulen movement shout slogans. Osman Orsal/Reuters

Schools and campuses are regarded as sites of potential social change in Turkey.
In this context, it is no accident that the Gülen movement – launched by a Muslim cleric with the professed intent to improve first Turkish civil society and then humankind – started by providing K-12 and higher education to those in Turkey and abroad.

The movement, which today has gained extraordinary influence is allegedly behind the failed coup attempt in Turkey. To this day, it operates thousands of schools throughout the world, including the United States.

President Erdoğan too used schools to start a revival movement in Sunni Islamic studies. At one time, in fact, both President Erdogan and Islamic scholar Gulen were considered to be allies.

Stranglehold over academia

The current Turkish government’s stranglehold over academia started in 2013 when Erdoğan, who had been prime minister was elected president.

Over the past three years, human rights in Turkey have been increasingly curbed, although the president and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) have continually denied any such restrictions.

University students protest against Turkey’s higher education board. Osman Orsal/Reuters

I personally felt his wrath in January 2016 when I signed a petition, along with thousands of like-minded academics, calling for the conflict with the Kurds to be solved by peaceful, not military, means.

The Turkish-Kurdish conflict has existed since the establishment of the Turkish Republic. Erdoğan himself started a peace process with the Kurds in 2011, while he was prime minister of Turkey. But after becoming president, he ordered military operations against them.

It was in this context that we protested the violence. Erdoğan’s response to our petition was emphatic:

“There is no difference between a terrorist with a gun and bomb in his hand and those who use their work and pen to support terror. The fact that an individual could be a deputy, an academic, an author, a journalist or the director of an NGO [nongovernmental organization] does not change the fact that that person is a terrorist.”

He asked the HEI president to investigate, and many university presidents were forced to fire the signatories.

Having formed a Listserv, we signatories were still trying to decide how to resist this violence wreaked upon us when the new wave of purges commenced.

Where will Turkey go next?

I, for one, have decided not to travel to my country of origin this summer for the first time ever for fear of arrest.

Where will Turkey go from here? I spend many sleepless nights, feeling just as I did when I first read George Orwell’s “1984.” Just like Orwell’s dystopian society – a society with oppressive controls – the current Turkish state and the government are, it seems, out to silence all people capable of producing new and independent thinking and research in Turkey.

As most of such minds are concentrated in Turkish academia, they will all be destroyed unless they turn into obedient and pious consumers.

The Conversation

Fatma Müge Göçek, Professor of Sociology and Women’s Studies, University of Michigan

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership

How to help students be effective leaders

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

A guest column by Anita Ginsburg

Effective leadership is a combination of personality, skills and attitude. Although personality and people skills are important, leadership is primarily about attitude, values and experience. Students who develop strong personal values and positive attitudes become natural leaders because other people are moved by them.

Teaching Leadership Values

It is important to understand what real leadership is. A leader isn’t necessarily the boss or simply a person in power or a high-ranking position. True leadership is the ability to inspire others to take positive actions or make changes that they otherwise would not. The power of true leadership doesn’t come from authority. Rather, it comes from personal values the leader displays. The greatest leadership values are perseverance, commitment, excellence, a positive attitude and the ability to overcome adverse situations. Leaders see challenges instead of obstacles. They are always striving to move ahead and do their best, and they never give up on what they know is right.

Providing Broad Life and Community Experience

The more knowledge and experience a person has, the more they will be able to make smart decisions and examine differing viewpoints. The ability to show empathy and wisdom is another hallmark of great leaders. Great leaders tend to understand and respect the differences between people and discover ways to get people working together.

Discovering Interests and Passions

Most great leaders are driven by a passion for something. They are then able to ignite that passion in others who follow them. It is important for any student to find that special thing that drives them and piques their interest. Students often find their passions unexpectedly as they are introduced to new concepts or ideas. It is important to encourage students to explore and step outside of their comfort zones where they might find something they are passionate about.

Making the Right Social Connections

Few, if any, great leaders operated alone. Great achievements are often group efforts. Students that are able to make the right positive connections with both peers and role models are likely to be on the path toward success and leadership. It is important to encourage students to seek out people that will support them and help them grow and learn and to avoid people that pull them down or who don’t care about them.

Encouraging a Quality Educational Experience

A quality education gives young people the skills and information they need to be successful. This is especially true in terms of higher education. For example, a master’s of public policy online can provide students with all of the opportunities and values that help develop leadership. Students entering college may not know exactly what ignites their passions and they may not have all the right social connections. Mostly likely those students are still trying to gain quality experience and may be stepping far outside their comfort zones for the first time. The right college environment allows them to gain the experience, connections and skills they need to become the powerful and influential leaders of tomorrow.

Overall, being a good example of an effective leader and providing students with resources can help inspire them to be more influential leaders themselves.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Policy & Reform

Are gifted kids more sensitive to screen violence?

Jonathan Wai, Duke University; Brad Bushman, The Ohio State University, and Yakup Cetin, Fatih University

The past few weeks have been full of several unfortunate violent events: the massacre in Orlando, the killing of black men by police officers, the sniper attack in Dallas, the Bastille Day attack in France, the violent coup attempt in Turkey and the shooting in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

While many of us may not have been directly affected by these events, we watched the news as it unfolded on broadcast and social media. Witnessing such violence on media can take a severe toll on us even when our near and dear ones are not directly affected.

Surprisingly, what research is beginning to uncover is that impact on young children – especially young gifted children – can be worse.

Impact of violence on adults and children

A large body of research has demonstrated a link between exposure to violent media and aggression and violent behavior across multiple countries and cultures. A synthesis of this literature found different reactions in adults and children. The short-term impact of watching violence on screen was greater for adults, while the long-term effects were greater for children.

Research specifically related to children has shown that violent media events like the ones we are currently seeing can frighten and worry them. Scholars have discussed how witnessing violence harms children’s mental health.

However, this impact can vary. We are researchers who study gifted children and violence. Although definitions of “gifted” vary, gifted children can be generally defined as those high in general intelligence as indicated by a standardized test score.

Gifted kids show greater motivation, memory, moral reasoning and development. US Army Garrison Red Cloud – Casey Follow, CC BY-NC-ND

Based on this definition, gifted children tend to have many advantages. For example, higher intelligence is linked to greater achievement, motivation, memory, moral reasoning and development, social skills, sense of humor, educational and occupational attainment, leadership, and even creativity. Higher intelligence is also linked to lower impulsive behavior, delinquency and crime.

However, research also shows that higher intelligence is linked with greater emotional sensitivity. Scholars studying gifted children have argued that because of this, they are not necessarily advantaged in all contexts.

Studying the impact of violence on gifted kids

But what things might gifted children might be more sensitive to? One factor that might play a role is violence – even violence depicted in something as seemingly harmless as cartoons.

Along with Cengiz Altay, a doctoral student at Fatih University, we tested 74 “gifted” children and 70 children from Turkey who were “less gifted” or had relatively lower intelligence scores. The “gifted” group were those students scoring 130 or higher (top two percent) on the intelligence scale. The school from which these students were drawn had a gifted students unit and were initially screened for higher intelligence than the general population.

The study was conducted in 2015 over a period of half a year. At the time of the study, these children were 10 years old. We examined whether exposure to media containing violence compared to media that did not contain violence differently affected the verbal ability of children.

To do that, we asked all students to take a verbal test before (pre-test) and after (post-test) watching a video. Participants were asked to generate words from a different set of letters for both these tests.

The most common letters in the Turkish alphabet were randomly divided into two groups for the pre-test and post-test. In the pretest, participants were asked to generate words starting with the letters A, L, M, S, C, E, B and H. In the post-test, participants had to generate words starting with the letters I, D, N, O, F, K and T. They had one minute to list as many words as possible that began with the particular letters.

Between the pre-test and post-test, participants in both the gifted and less gifted groups were randomly assigned to watch either a nonviolent cartoon or a violent cartoon. We used two animation shows that are commonly watched by children.

Even animation series that depict violence can have an impact.Loren Javier, CC BY-ND

One was “Bakugan Battle Brawlers,” a series with episodes that depict violence in a battle, and the other “Arthur” – a story that revolves around the many friend and family issues of a young boy named Arthur. This latter series does not have any episodes of screen violence.

What our findings show

Our research, published recently in Gifted Child Quarterly, a leading journal on the study of giftedness, shows that children’s abilities could be negatively impacted by exposure to violence, especially gifted children.

We found that gifted students generated more words than the other students when they were asked to generate words prior to watching the video. However, the gifted students assigned to the video which showed violence generated slightly fewer words than the less gifted group after they had watched the video.

Conversely, when gifted students were shown the cartoon without violence, they outperformed the other students on both the pre-test and the post-test. This suggests that it was the violence in the cartoons that reduced the gifted students’ mental performance rather than simply watching a cartoon.

Overall, all kids under performed after watching the violence, but gifted kids showed a greater performance drop.

Are gifted kids more sensitive?

One commonly held belief is that gifted students don’t need help and will do fine on their own. This perception may be due to the empirical evidence showing that many gifted students do end up quite successful later in life.

Scholars, however, have argued that it is a myth that gifted students don’t face problems and challenges. Our study adds to the evidence that gifted children do face disadvantages or challenges, specifically when it comes to exposure to screen violence. Violence in the media impact children generally, but our study shows this negative impact is amplified for students with higher intelligence.

We are just beginning to explore the reasons for this surprising finding. Perhaps greater sensitivity of the “gifted” group leads them to react with more anxiety to the violent media. And perhaps exposure to such media lowers their working memory capacity, reduces their attention to the mental task and thus lowers their performance. In our study, gifted children thought the violent cartoon was more violent, liked it less and saw it less frequently at home than did the other children.

Screen violence and harm

Our findings have implications for parents, educators and policymakers who need to be aware that violence on screen may have a negative impact on kids, and in particular gifted kids. The impact of violent video on verbal tasks could be particularly important given the heavily verbal nature of schools.

Screen violence could lead to nightmares and other sleep disturbances. Boys image via www.shutterstock.com

A just-released statement from The American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended, along with attention to children’s “media diets,” that “parents should be mindful of what shows their children watch and which games they play.” Other experts too have warned that screen violence, whether real or fictional, could lead to nightmares, sleep disturbances and increased general anxiety.

Our findings support this earlier evidence. In general, the violence depicted in our videos was quite small compared to the violence that children are often exposed to, such as in the news. So, it’s possible our study provides a lower estimate on the impact of violent media on the mental performance of children.

Optimal educational development requires not only including positive impacts but also reducing and removing negative impacts. Such risk factors could be greatest for talented but disadvantaged students who likely live in neighborhoods with higher rates of violence, which might accumulate and contribute to their eventual underachievement.

With the rise of digital devices and constant switching of tasks, it is difficult to control student exposure to violence. However, more attention needs to be paid to media diets that could detract from educational development over a period of time.

The Conversation

Jonathan Wai, Research Scientist, Duke University; Brad Bushman, Professor of Communication and Psychology, The Ohio State University, and Yakup Cetin, Head of the Department of Foreign Language Education, Fatih University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert

Do students lose depth in digital reading?

Naomi Baron, American University

Do students learn as much when they read digitally as they do in print?

For both parents and teachers, knowing whether computer-based media are improving or compromising education is a question of concern. With the surge in popularity of e-books, online learning and open educational resources, investigators have been trying to determine whether students do as well when reading an assigned text on a digital screen as on paper.

The answer to the question, however, needs far more than a yes-no response.

Reading in print versus digitally

In my research, I have compared the ways in which we read in print and onscreen. Between 2013 and 2015, I gathered data from 429 university students drawn from five countries (the U.S., Japan, Germany, Slovenia and India).

The students in my study reported that print was aesthetically more enjoyable, saying things such as “I like the smell of paper” or that reading in print is “real reading.” What’s more, print gave them a sense of where they were in the book – they could “see” and “feel” where they were in the text.

Print is easier on the eyes. H. Moon, CC BY-NC-ND

Print was also judged to be easier on the eyes and less likely to encourage multitasking. Almost half the participants complained about eyestrain from reading digitally (“my eyes burn”), and 67 percent indicated they were likely to multitask while reading digitally (compared with 41 percent when reading print).

At the same time, respondents praised digital reading on a number of counts, including the ability to read in the dark, ease of finding material (“plenty of quick information”), saving paper and even the fact they could multitask while reading.

Measuring learning

But the bigger question is whether students are learning as much when they read onscreen.

A number of researchers have sought to measure learning by asking people to read a passage of text, either in print or on a digital device, and then testing for comprehension.

Most studies have found that participants scored about the same when reading in each medium, though a few have indicated that students performed better on tests when they read in print.

The problem, however, with learning-measurement studies is that their notion of “learning” has tended to be simplistic. Reading passages and answering questions afterwards may be a familiar tool in standardized testing, but tells us little about any deeper level of understanding.

Some researchers are beginning to pose more nuanced questions, including one scholar who has considered what happens when people read a story in print or on a digital device and are then asked to reconstruct the plot sequence. The answer: Print yielded better results.

Another aspect of learning is to see how outcomes differ when students are doing their reading in less prescriptive experimental conditions. One study let students choose how much time to spend when reading on each platform. The researchers found that participants devoted less time to reading the passage onscreen – and performed less well on the subsequent comprehension test.

This finding is hardly surprising, given the tendency so many of us have to skim and search when going online, rather than reading slowly and carefully. In my study, one student commented,

“It takes more time to read the same number of pages in print comparing to digital.”

Another complained,

“It takes me longer because I read more carefully.”

Critical thinking and reading

How does the learning question relate to educational goals? There is much buzz today about wanting students to be good at critical thinking. Definitions of that goal are elusive, but it’s pretty clear they involve being able to understand complex ideas, evaluate evidence, weigh alternative perspectives and construct justifiable arguments.

To become proficient in critical thinking – at least in a literate society – students need to be able to handle text. The text may be long, complex or both. To make sense of it, students cannot skim, rush ahead or continually get distracted.

So, does reading in print versus onscreen build critical thinking skills?

Reading helps develop critical thinking skills. mrskradz, CC BY-ND

The comprehension studies we talked about earlier tell us little about the kind of reading we recognize as necessary for serious contemplation or analysis. An alternative approach, at least for starters, is asking students about their digital and paper-based reading patterns – much as physicians ask for histories (along with physicals and lab tests) to figure out what ails their patients.

While my own study didn’t directly measure learning, it did query students about their reading patterns and preferences. The responses to some of my questions were particularly revealing.

When asked on which medium they felt they concentrated best, 92 percent replied “print.” For long academic readings, 86 percent favored print. Participants also reported being more likely to reread academic materials if they were in print.

What’s more, a number of students indicated they believed print was a better medium for learning. One said,

“It’s easier to focus.”

Others stated,

“[I] feel like the content sticks in the head more easily” and

“I feel like I understand it more.”

By contrast, in talking about digital screens, students noted “danger of distraction” and “no concentration.”

Obviously, student perceptions are not the same thing as measurable learning outcomes. And my research didn’t probe connections between reading platforms and critical thinking.

However, a pattern did emerge: Print stood out as the medium for doing serious work.

Digital is convenient and cheaper

At the same time, we cannot ignore other factors impacting students’ decisions about what reading platform to chose for school work.

Convenience is one big consideration: More than 40 percent of participants in my study mentioned convenience (including easy access to materials) as what they liked most about reading onscreen.

Money is another variable. Students were highly conscious about differential prices for print and digital versions of reading materials, with cost often driving choice. As one student put it,

“Cost rules everything around me.”

Many students revealed a mismatch between finances and learning. When queried about which reading platform they would choose if cost were the same, 87 percent said “print” for academic work.

Adapting to digital learning

We also need to keep in mind the growing trend for universities to adapt their curricula to fit the proverbial “procrustean” bed of a digital world – a world tailor-made for skimming, scanning and using the “find” function rather than reading slowly and thoughtfully.

How can digital be adapted? ITU Pictures, CC BY

Professors now toy with ditching long or complex reading assignments in favor of short (or more straightforward) ones, moving closer to digital reading patterns in the nonacademic world. This world hypes condensed versions of texts and shorter reading material that is bite-sized to begin with.

The question then is how can universities help students read text thoughtfully, reflectively, and without distraction on digital devices?

One key could be adaptation. Research suggests students may be overconfident about what they are understanding when they read digitally. Teaching them to be mindful in their digital reading (for instance, by writing down key words from the reading) may help in learning.

Another form of adaptation is happening in the realm of digital hardware and software. Modern screens cause less eyestrain, and annotation programs continue to improve. Some digital reading devices now come with tools enabling them to digitally approximate physical page flipping and multiple place-marking.

However, in my view, while short-and-to-the-point may be a good fit for digital consumption, it’s not the sort of reading likely to nurture the critical thinking we still talk about as a hallmark of university education.

The Conversation

Naomi Baron, Executive Director, Center for Teaching, Research, and Learning, American University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Ask An Expert, Matthew Lynch

How to Spell Words Made Easy: Go Back To The Roots

Note: Julie Bradley has been an educator for more than 30 years. Her expertise has taken her to outback Australia and around the world presenting to educators and parents on spelling and foundational skills. Mrs Bradley is Managing Director of Smart Achievers, a worldwide distributor for Smart Words Spelling, Reading and Perceptual Motor Programs.

Another amazing session in Minnesota, USA with spelling guru, Denise Eide, was on Greek and Latin roots. You might wonder why we need to bother with these when we are learning how to spell words in English. What’s interesting is that 95% of multisyllabic words in English are based on Latin and Greek roots.

Here are some key points from the lessons:

Knowing the history of words and sounds helps us to understand how to spell them. If we know which, when and how to use suffixes and prefixes we can extend our working vocabulary by thousands of words in one lesson, in one day.

We have to start getting smarter in the way we are teaching our kids. This is very important if we want our kids to be considered literate and to know 200,000 words by the time they are 26 years old.

A list of 20 words a week is not going to help kids make the grade. In fact, they won’t even rate as ‘average’ if they learn 100 words a week. They have to learn 27 words a day, 365 days a year, for 20 years to rate as ‘well educated.’

With some clever teaching, kids can learn how to spell thousands of words. We can help them do this with simple explanations and a few well planned activities.

When kids know how to spell words, they know the code needed to read and write. Reading won’t teach kids to spell, though. If they don’t know the code well, they won’t trust it enough to use it. That’s why we have so many struggling readers today.

No kid should be left behind. You may think ‘so what if they can’t spell?’ Did you know that 85% of juvenile offenders are functionally illiterate? Literacy rates are closely tied to delinquency and are considered by some to be the best predictor that a kid may end up in prison or on welfare. Today, 70% of inmates are functionally illiterate!

So my question is: what do you want for your kids?

In four days in the Minnesota, USA I have learnt amazing ways to make it easier for our kids to learn how to spell words so they can achieve success in both reading and writing.

I can’t wait to get home and start sharing it all with you.

Join my quest to help kids so we don’t hear any more sad stories of kids feeling “dumb” and ashamed because they can’t read and write.

Let’s change our children’s lives for the better, today.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Policy & Reform, Secondary Education, Teachers

High school Dropout Rates Up; Are Math and Science the Cause?

More rigorous math and science requirements for high school graduation are in place, and simultaneously dropout rates in the country are up.

Research back to 1990 showed that the US dropout rate rose to a high of 11.4 percent when students were required to take six math and science courses, compared with 8.6 percent for students who needed less math and science courses in order to graduate.

The dropout rate is up to 5 percentage points higher when gender, race and ethnicity are considered.

William F. Tate, vice provost for graduate education and dean of the Graduate School of Arts & Sciences says that part of the problem with adding math and science courses to requirements was that a significant number of students weren’t prepared to meet the revised requirements.

Andrew Plunk, a postdoctoral research fellow in the psychiatry department at Washington University School of Medicine, says the study highlights that the one-size-fits all approach to education requirements is not ideal due to various demographic groups, states and school districts that are all different.

When educational policies cause an unintentional consequence like an increase in students dropping out, the effects reverberate far beyond the classroom walls.

“Communities with higher dropout rates tend to have increased crime,” says Plunk. “Murders are more common. A previous study estimated that a 1 percent reduction in the country’s high school dropout rate could result in 400 fewer murders per year.”

While I do feel that the high drop out rate could be blamed on math and science courses, I don’t feel that the US should ease up on those requirements. I think the key is to better prepare the students. We need to make sure the students are ready for the requirements and aim to help all students graduate high school.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Education Leadership

Should schools provide free breakfast in classrooms?

Sean Corcoran, New York University; Amy Ellen Schwartz, New York University, and Michele Leardo, New York University

Child hunger is a serious problem: 48 million Americans, including more than 15 million children, live in households that lack the means to get enough nutritious food on a regular basis. In large cities, about 25 percent of households with children do not have sufficient food.

The federally funded National School Breakfast Program has long sought to improve these numbers, by providing a free or low-cost breakfast for students in participating schools. In addition to reducing food insecurity, the program has been found to improve students’ health and nutritional intake as well as their academic achievement.

Even though school breakfast is affordable (or free), meets federal nutrition guidelines and has the potential to benefit children in multiple ways, participation in the School Breakfast Program is surprisingly low. Nationally, only about half of eligible students participating in the School Lunch Program take breakfast.

In fact, in New York City, less than a third of all students take a breakfast each day. This is particularly surprising because breakfast has been offered free to all students since September 2003.

So why are the numbers taking advantage of free breakfast so low? What difference might it make if they were higher?

Why don’t kids eat free breakfast?

There are several reasons that participation in the School Breakfast Program is low.

Why don’t children eat breakfast? sheri chen, CC BY-NC

First, breakfast is offered in the cafeteria before school hours, and many students are unable to arrive to school early, because of transportation or family commitments. Second, children may not be aware that breakfast is served in the cafeteria before school. Finally, children are often unwilling because of the stigma associated with a trip to the cafeteria for a free breakfast.

Introduced more than a decade ago, Breakfast in the Classroom (BIC) has been adopted in many school districts as part of the school day. Breakfast is offered free to all students in their classroom at the start of the day, rather than providing it in the cafeteria before the bell. Cities such as Los Angeles, Dallas, Detroit, Cincinnati and Newark show high rates of participation.

Here is how it works

Breakfast in the Classroom is given during the first 10-20 minutes of the school day. It typically includes cold, packaged items (such as cereal, bagels, yogurt and fresh fruit). In some schools, breakfast is offered on mobile carts as students walk in the door (“Grab-n-Go”), or as a “Second Chance” breakfast, between the first and second periods of middle or high school.

New York City began rolling out Breakfast in the Classroom in 2007. According to the Department of Education, the program is now offered in nearly 500 of the city’s 1,700 schools. The city serves over 30,000 classroom breakfasts each day. Beginning this year, it is expanding the program to all elementary schools. And there are plans to extend the program to all schools in the district.

Advocates for the program argue that in addition to reducing hunger and food insecurity, moving breakfast from the cafeteria into the classroom will, in turn, improve school attendance and academic performance. Some also argue it will improve student engagement by building a sense of community around eating breakfast together, and provide an opportunity to integrate nutrition and healthy eating habits into the curriculum.

However, critics have raised concerns that Breakfast in the Classroom could contribute to weight gain, as some children consume more calories by eating two breakfasts – one at home and one at school. Or that the program could take away from instructional time at the start of the school day.

What does evidence show?

Our research looked at the early effects of New York City’s Breakfast in the Classroom program. We examined the program’s effects on school breakfast participation, student weight outcomes including body mass index (BMI) and obesity, as well as academic outcomes. We tracked data on student weight and academic achievement at different points of time, to compare students in schools that did and did not adopt the program.

Our sample included students in over 1,100 NYC public elementary and middle schools between the 2006-07 and 2011-12 school years (of which about 300 offered Breakfast in the Classroom at the time of our study).

Does breakfast in classroom lead to obesity? U.S. Department of Agriculture, CC BY

To begin with, we found that serving breakfast in classroom substantially increased school breakfast participation. For example, in schools offering breakfast in classroom in 25 percent or more of classrooms but not schoolwide, the participation rate nearly doubled. The increase was even higher – about two-and-a-half times – for schools offering the program schoolwide.

Importantly, we found no evidence that Breakfast in the Classroom led to student weight gain. We found no impact on BMI or the incidence of obesity. We also found no evidence that breakfast in the classroom reduced academic performance, as measured by achievement on reading and math standardized tests for students in grades three through eight.

Serve breakfast in classrooms

Our study suggests that the program certainly did no harm by taking away from instructional time or increasing student weight.

Other rigorous research on Breakfast in the Classroom has found the program can improve school attendance and increase academic achievement.

Taken together, our results show serving breakfast in the classroom increased participation in school breakfast even when free breakfast was being served in the school cafeteria.

Our work also shows critics’ fears that the Breakfast in the Classroom program will cause weight gain and reduce academic performance due to a loss of instructional time are largely unwarranted. There is no reason, therefore, not to expand Breakfast in the Classroom.

The Conversation

Sean Corcoran, Associate Professor of Educational Economics, New York University; Amy Ellen Schwartz, Professor of Public Policy, Education, and Economics and Director of the NYU Institute for Education and Social Policy, New York University, and Michele Leardo, Assistant Director of Education and Social Policy, New York University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  • no reactions
0
Share